Put A Disclaimer on the Main Page??

[Revolution9]

Please don't pull the older-and-wiser and I-was-here-first shtick on this crowd. We all know you're significantly older than many of the posters here and have been on the forum longer. Lay off the grouchy old man behavior already.

Yes, gramps, I'm sure that when YOU were a kid in the golden days of the mid-twentieth century, people knew how to run a revolution the right way, unlike these kids today who think they know everything, blah blah blah.

WELL, THIS IS THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY AND A NEW GENERATION HAS ARISEN. STOP TRYING TO BOSS US AROUND.

I was speaking of time on this forum..not age.. Gramps indeed. LE and myself have seen this fight go down many, many times with the same outcome. TThe board owners stick to the principles of liberty and free expression. I have had several dozen warnings from them but as long as I stated my case succinctly they were fine with it. They have even sent me messages thanking me for some of my posts. I carved out Hot Topics with the assistance of the board owners and nearly got banned for my original efforts until the impeccability of my logic in regards to freedom of expression, liberty and openness and transparency .. I assume..may have been my incessant bitching..got that forum designated. I rarely go there and read there. I am not a 911 truth movement adherent, nor a conspiracy theorist. I am a historian and amamteur intelligence analyst though so I do have interest in alot of areas. Furthermore..much of the nastiness in the Hot Topics forum is not promulgated by the transparency in public safety issues contingent but those who seem to be aginst transparency in public safety issues who say some of the most denigrating things about these people, their intelligence level and ability to discern reality. They are smply trolling. Exceppt for the paid disinfo agents who seem to roll through there with different handles but the same disinfo sites and writing styles..

Censorship here is dead flat wrong. We have always taken care of any issues amongst the forum members in regards to trolls or shit disturbers who are simply shit disturbing. We have a great forum community and it does not need to be messed up by authoritarianism or collectivist thought inculcation or political correctness or fear or media clowns and fools and assorted gaping fumaroles of inflammatory rhetoric.

Regards
Randy

 

[fcofer]

Censorship here is dead flat wrong. We have always taken care of any issues amongst the forum members in regards to trolls or shit disturbers who are simply shit disturbing. We have a great forum community and it does not need to be messed up by authoritarianism or collectivist thought inculcation or political correctness or fear or media clowns and fools and assorted gaping fumaroles of inflammatory rhetoric.

Hear, hear.

 

[mfoley1]

you can do it!

 

[Suzu]

You are so ****ing full of **** about this.

I want to ****ing make it plain and clear that you censorshup Nazis are getting out of ****ing control and I will ****ing swear my ******** mouth off if you all do not stop it with your ****ing board nazi bull**** and condescending backbiting of your fellow RP supporters. You do not pwn the ****ing monopoly on truth. Noone needs to change their person or life becase the are involved with the grassroots. Yoiu Borg agents of the MSM Medea Priests can take a hike and go hand out slimjims. Or go turn on your 60CPS golem programmer and then get all worried some idiot pundit will again not use their brain and make some stuopid statement or deny the truth for the zillionth time. When they do that be sure to be enraptured by the reel. Then come back here and make sure everybody conforms to your fears.

Be rest assured. I will never be afraid of your bogey man. He is a regurgitation of your fevered imagination and cannot harm me..

Randy, what will harm you is your own anger. The emotion of rage causes biochemical changes in the body, the saliva pH becomes the equivalent of rattlesnake venom. Others reading your spew, if they are sensitive, are also affected. Not to mention how you look to forum visitors and how that affects Dr. Paul. "The beating of a butterfly's wings" and all that.

Men are like government bonds, I guess... They take sooooooo long to mature!

 

[inibo]

Men are like government bonds, I guess... They take sooooooo long to mature!

I resemble that remark, it only took me about fifty years.

I voted for the disclaimer, something to the effect that "The opinions expressed here are the opinions of the individual posters and do not reflect the opinions of RonPaulForums.com or the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee."

That being said I do not favor getting rid of Hot Topics. I've got news for you: Old Media people and supporters of other candidates have been coming here from the very beginning. If the stuff in Hot Topics could hurt us it would have already happened. There have already been attempted hit pieces written based on stuff people have found here, it's been going on for months. For the most part they've gotten very little traction because professional journalist know that trying to write a substantial story based on Internet forum posts makes them look like idiots.

There are always going to be people who are opposed to us regardless, e.g., RedState and DailyKOS. Nothing we say or do is going to change that. Those people are marginal and they are the ones who have tried to use Ron Paul's supporters against him. It has gotten them nowhere. Old Media and regular voters don't give two hoots about them and this is as it should be.

I, for one, trust our moderators. If I see a post that is blatantly offensive, racist or antisemitic I flag it with the

icon and tell them why I think it should be moved, locked or deleted. I suggest everyone else do the same. Self-government doesn't just mean me governing myself, it means us governing each other. That is not collectivism or mob rule, it is spontaneous order. Freedom and order are emergent properties of people being free and orderly.

 

[ronpaulfan]

Disclaimer = more freedom to post = good

 

[davidhperry]

I also think it would be a good thing to do. Even if it said something along the lines of "Unofficial Ron Paul Forums" or "Official Unofficial Ron Paul Forums"

 

[Menthol Patch]

We should not eliminate free speech on this forum. If we do then we are no better than the neo-cons.

 

[Corydoras]

We have always taken care of any issues amongst the forum members in regards to trolls or shit disturbers who are simply shit disturbing.

"Taken care of." Don't you understand that it comes across as classic bullying by a grouchy old guy who if he were less interested in politics would spend his spare time yelling at the kids running across his lawn?

 

[rrt82]

Well, two things to consider:

1. The US Constitution only applies to the government, the admins of this site can limit speech in anyway they seem fit to do so.

2. There needs to be restraint as long as people think this site is part of Ron Paul. Even with a disclaimer on the front page, our actions on this forum reflect on Dr. Paul. I think profanities should be censored, and I believe we should act like adults. I've seen improvement, as I have not been rick-rolled in a while on here.

As Ron Paul himself has said, it's a big tent and he attracts many supporters from all different backgrounds and beliefs. A few people believe that 9/11 was an inside job, and some of those people support Dr. Paul. That's fine, but I believe there is a time and a place to debate what happened on that horrible day. A forum dedicated to electing Dr. Paul President is not the place for that discussion. I don't want the good Doc associated with conspiracy nuts.

If we are going to win the hearts of the average American, we have to act like average Americans, period. The media will be looking for anything, and since Ron Paul's hands are clean they will have to make stuff up. Think before you speak, and don't let them dig dirt up on these forums.

I think a disclaimer is a wonderful idea. In fact, I'd take it one step further and find a way to put at the top of everypage that this website is not affiliated with the campaign at all.

 

[pcosmar]

Voted Other.
On one hand it can't hurt. Plausible Denial.
On the other it is not necessary. Not part of the official Campaign.
Then on the ,, never mind, thats a foot.

 

[Suzu]

As far as I'm concerned there is no room for debate here! Maybe some of you "free speech" advocates have not thought this issue through yet? This is our ONE CHANCE to get our country back - and maybe even save the planet from a nuclear holocaust - and all you care about is your "freedom" to use cuss words here?

Whatever it takes, if this was *my* forum, it would be made "work safe". No matter what it takes!! We can do very well without all the profanity! How often have you heard Ron Paul using such language??? Like it or not, WE REPRESENT HIM to everyone who looks at this forum!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[fcofer]

Well, two things to consider:

1. The US Constitution only applies to the government, the admins of this site can limit speech in anyway they seem fit to do so.

Totally irrelevant. Just because they can doesn't mean that they should. I don't care that much about censoring swear words (although I think it's a silly waste of time), but deleting people's opinions just because they are not "mainstream" and "average" is something I totally oppose. The forums would literally disintegrate due to the chilling effect on spontaneity and creativity and the resultant blowback.

2. There needs to be restraint as long as people think this site is part of Ron Paul. Even with a disclaimer on the front page, our actions on this forum reflect on Dr. Paul.

That's true to an extent, and we should encourage people to self-censor. However, we are never going to be able to control it completely without destroying the forum. I think that the benefit that comes from an open, transparent ronpaulforums.com is inestimable to the campaign, and we can't afford to marginalize it in order to avoid some spurious perceived risk.

I think profanities should be censored, and I believe we should act like adults. I've seen improvement, as I have not been rick-rolled in a while on here.

Well, you can't really censor the profanity -- if you think you can, sell the idea to an anti-spam company and donate the millions to the Ron Paul Campaign. As for the rick-rolling, I guess the lesson to be learned is that we can accomplish change through social pressure rather than resorting to censorship, right?

As Ron Paul himself has said, it's a big tent and he attracts many supporters from all different backgrounds and beliefs. A few people believe that 9/11 was an inside job, and some of those people support Dr. Paul. That's fine, but I believe there is a time and a place to debate what happened on that horrible day. A forum dedicated to electing Dr. Paul President is not the place for that discussion. I don't want the good Doc associated with conspiracy nuts.

Well, I'm not a truther myself, but I can think of no better place for supporters of Ron Paul who subscribe to this conspiracy theory to talk about it than the Hot Topics forum. If you get rid of the Hot Topics forum, they will talk about it in the public forums. Try to understand that to some people, Ron Paul's emphasis on transparency and openness in government is central to their support for him. We need a big tent, as you say. Let's not label people as nuts, and let's not prevent them from talking in their designated areas.

If we are going to win the hearts of the average American, we have to act like average Americans, period.

I totally disagree. We have to act like grassroots political activists, and one of the ways that we get better at that is by talking politics with each other and generating enthusiasm by listening to people who have similar political opinions and goals. The primary purpose of this forum has not been, and never will be, direct advertisement.

The media will be looking for anything, and since Ron Paul's hands are clean they will have to make stuff up. Think before you speak, and don't let them dig dirt up on these forums.

Here, I totally agree. The media will take anything when the smears begin. Things will be made up out of thin air. I'd rather have a free, uncensored forum with all the creativity and inclusiveness that has gotten us so far, with social pressure to keep people self-censoring. However, I think that we're overestimating the negative smear value to the campaign of some dude's post on an Internet forum. Let's not overreact.

I think a disclaimer is a wonderful idea. In fact, I'd take it one step further and find a way to put at the top of everypage that this website is not affiliated with the campaign at all.

Sure -- "ronpaulforums.com -- part of the free speech zone of the USA." Seriously, though, what you propose is fine with me, so that any screenshot of the forum will include the disclaimer.

 

[fcofer]

As far as I'm concerned there is no room for debate here! Maybe some of you "free speech" advocates have not thought this issue through yet? This is our ONE CHANCE to get our country back - and maybe even save the planet from a nuclear holocaust - and all you care about is your "freedom" to use cuss words here?

We "free speech advocates" also feel that you, um, censorship advocates, have not thought this through. Since we're free speech advocates, though, we always think that there's room for debate.

I don't care as much about protecting profanity on the forums, but I care very much about protecting ideas from being deleted. I've lurked over at Huck's grassroots forum from time to time, and I'm amazed at how much they are hobbling themselves by deleting any discussions that reflect negatively on their candidate in even the slightest way -- the drain on creativity and the amount of genuine Huck supporters they lose due to blowback is pretty significant.

I also think that you are overestimating the reach of these forums to "average" voters. I've been a Paul supporter since May, and I didn't even visit this site until August. People who are not used to the Internet are not likely to troll the forums -- and if they are used to it, then they will be used to the attendant language, also.

Whatever it takes, if this was *my* forum, it would be made "work safe". No matter what it takes!! We can do very well without all the profanity! How often have you heard Ron Paul using such language??? Like it or not, WE REPRESENT HIM to everyone who looks at this forum!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sacrificing freedoms because they are perceived to be inconvenient at the time is not advisable. This is one of Paul's mantras and one of the main reasons that many of us support him. I think you ought to consider whether having an open, free forum has contributed much to the success of the Paul campaign before you advocate doing away with the openness.

If you are talking just about the profanity, then the final point that I will make is that it is technically impossible to stop it, short of having lots of human moderators to check tons of flagged posts. I suppose that we could work things to where every post had to be vetted before it was published to the forum, but that would really ruin things. You don't really mean, "No matter what the cost," do you?

The best way to get things the way you want them (and, one of the penalties of freedom is that it is pretty much impossible to control everyone's actions) is to convince a lot of other people on the board of your position. Then, when people use profanity in public areas of the forum, they will be subjected to rebuke from others, which will discourage them. There will always be some profanity, but if we change the character of this forum to discourage it, that will be far more effective, and far less costly, then forceful censorship.

 

[blamx8]

Sacrificing freedoms because they are perceived to be inconvenient at the time is not advisable.

To harness and control a freedom in order to make it work in our best interest should not be confused with sacrificing them.

A well thought out, considerate, unifying, intelligent use of the freedom of speech will do much more to move us toward the desired goal than a name calling, belittling, or offensive rant that intensifies or magnifies opposition and polarizes supporters.

Either way the freedom of speech is ours. The question is whether we master it so it can have the greatest impact.

 

[DeadheadForPaul]

I think Josh can delete posts or do whatever he deems just given that it is his site. If you want to talk about unnecessarily damaging things to Dr Paul, start your own messageboard

 

[fcofer]

I think Josh can delete posts or do whatever he deems just given that it is his site.

Uh-huh. Except that Josh wants the grassroots campaign to succeed and to be a success, so I doubt that he will make the forums more authoritarian than necessary. He's in this for the Ron Paul campaign, not for himself. (Maybe I'm wrong; I've never met Josh, but this is what I suspect.)

If you want to talk about unnecessarily damaging things to Dr Paul, start your own messageboard

If you want to have criticisms censored and non-majoritarian opinions suppressed, start your own messageboard.

A little illustration: I thought that Nov. 5 was a bad idea. I admit it. But I didn't try to shut people up who were talking about it. There were calls for the entire idea to be suppressed because it was damaging to the campaign, because it was a false flag op designed to embarrass RP, etc. Search for it if you don't believe me.

I guess we can all agree that it's a damn good thing that the censors weren't convincing, eh?

Look at a certain other candidate's grassroots campaign. They have naysayers, just as we do, but their naysayers are backed by mods who lock and/or delete threads. From the outside looking in, it's incredible to me how much they are damaging their grassroots, all because they fear the (few) downsides of free speech.

 

[fcofer]

To harness and control a freedom in order to make it work in our best interest should not be confused with sacrificing them.

A well thought out, considerate, unifying, intelligent use of the freedom of speech will do much more to move us toward the desired goal than a name calling, belittling, or offensive rant that intensifies or magnifies opposition and polarizes supporters.

Either way the freedom of speech is ours. The question is whether we master it so it can have the greatest impact.

I'll have to say that your post has given me more pause than any other that I've read on this discussion. To answer you, I guess I'll say that of course I think that our discourse should remain civil and that we should be knowledgeable of the effect our actions have on the campaign. My position, however, is that the damage done to these forums by instituting a top-down system of censorship by deletion of posts would be far more injurious to the campaign (due to the importance of these forums to the grassroots) than whatever collateral damage we incur by not censoring.

Ideally, I'd like to see a DELETED POSTS subforum, where posts that have excessive profanity / vulgarity or that contain [suspected] false and misleading information could be moved. This way, the forums need not be accused of serious censorship and we would not risk the attendant blowback.

 

[michaelwise]

Use part of the audio from this mornings Face the Nation where Ron says that official campaign must distance itself from the grassroots effort for legal reasons.

 

[Zotde75]

Voted yes.